Free Speech Policy

Purpose

The Government of Ontario has mandated that every publicly assisted postsecondary institution must have a standalone free speech policy. The Government also required that the policy be based on the University of Chicago Statement on Principles of Free Expression. In Canada, the Charter of Rights and Freedom lists freedom of expression as a fundamental freedom and guarantees it “subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

The following policy statement was prepared by a committee comprised of representatives from the 24 publicly assisted colleges in Ontario.

Scope

This policy applies to all Seneca faculty, students, staff, management, guests and others who are present at Seneca.

Key definitions

Freedom of expression

The right to speak, write, listen, challenge and learn.

Hate speech

Any speech that incites hatred against a group or a class of persons especially on the basis of race, religion or sexual orientation.

Policy

1. Policy statement on upholding free speech

“The objects of the colleges are to offer a comprehensive program of career-oriented, postsecondary education and training to assist individuals in finding and keeping employment, to meet the needs of employers and the changing work environment and to support the economic and social development of their local and diverse communities” (Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology Act, 2002).
Freedom of expression, which means the right to speak, write, listen, challenge and learn, must be protected as it is essential to discovery, critical assessment and the effective dissemination of knowledge and ideas to social and economic advancement.
Seneca must be a place that allows for open discussion and free inquiry where diverse voices can be heard and ideas and viewpoints can be explored and discussed freely and debated openly without fear of reprisal, even if these are considered to be controversial or conflict with the views of some members of the Seneca community. Although Seneca greatly values civility and all members of Seneca share responsibility for maintaining a climate of mutual respect, it is not the role of Seneca to shield members of the Seneca community from ideas and opinions that they may find disagreeable or offensive. It is up to the individuals and not Seneca to make such judgements for themselves and to debate and challenge ideas they find unacceptable.
Members of the Seneca community are free to criticize and contest the views of others, however, they may not obstruct or interfere with the freedom of others to express their views. The rights of others to express or hear ideas must also be respected. Seneca may reasonably regulate the time, place and manner of freedom of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt normal Seneca operations and ordinary activities or endanger the safety of others.
Speech that violates the law, including the Ontario Human Rights Code, is not allowed. Speech that constitutes harassment, a threat or hate speech is not allowed. Other context-specific boundaries to freedom of expression may also apply such as those arising out of the terms of employment and collective agreements.
This policy statement is aligned with other Seneca policies, all of which shall be read in harmony.
Existing Seneca mechanisms and processes will be used to handle complaints and ensure compliance with this policy. Complaints that remain unresolved may be referred to the Ontario Ombudsman. Existing disciplinary measures will apply to those whose actions are contrary to this policy.
Seneca will consider official student groups’ compliance with the policy as a condition for ongoing financial support or recognition, and encourage student groups to adopt policies that align with this policy.

Supporting documentation

Appendix A: Grounds for appeal

Related Seneca policies

Related materials

Appendix A: Grounds for appeal

Grounds	Explanation	Suggested supporting documentation*
Merit of work	An academic decision that does not accurately reflect a student’s demonstrated abilities, actions and/or achievements. Examples include but are not limited to: a breach of academic integrity, e.g., plagiarism, contract cheating an assessment that may have been unfairly or inaccurately graded Prior Learning Assessment & Recognition (PLAR).	Specific and detailed reasons, in writing, as to why the original grade was inaccurate. Any relevant documentation, e.g., course notes, work experience, correspondence such as emails, letters, or academic integrity documentation. Samples of the student work from the course, such as essays, tests or assignments.
Personal bias/unfair treatment Note: If a concern relates to discrimination and/or harassment, please contact the Student Conduct Office and consult Seneca’s Discrimination and Harassment Policy	Perceived unfair treatment of a student by a faculty member in comparison to their treatment of other students within the course that negatively impacts a student’s performance.	A written record of the events and an explanation of how they affected the student’s ability to succeed. Course outline or assignments if appropriate.
Extenuating circumstance	An unforeseen significant event or circumstance that affected the student’s ability to meet the course requirements and was not accommodated. For example, medical and/or legal issues or other circumstances that have affected the student’s timely completion of an assignment, academic performance, or ability to meet academic obligations. Generally, employment commitments will not constitute grounds for academic appeal.	Note from a medical professional. A death certificate, or funeral arrangement documentation. Travel arrangement documentation. Legal documentation, such as summons or subpoena, a notice of jury selection, eviction notice, etc. Letters from counsellors, therapists, or religious advisers.
Course management	A departure by faculty from the course outline that negatively affects the student’s academic performance. Examples include: change in course delivery mode error in the application of established grading criteria faculty not following the learning outcomes.	Relevant course outline. Written record of the departure from the course outline and explanation of how it affected the student’s ability to succeed.

*Note: The supporting documentation suggested is not a comprehensive list and other documentation may be considered or required.

Approval Date: January 2019

Last Revision: January 2019